Tag Info

That... Was a pretty bad question. But it shouldn't have been an audit. Careful reading does indicate that it was likely intended as a question (and, critically, not intended to test the waters for future spam posting by dropping a pile of nonsense onto the site).
"Should Be Improved" is a stretch here; it'd take a fairly heroic edit to make that into a ...

This was not a good candidate for migration. It is on-topic at Stack Overflow, and migration is intended for off-topic questions.
Perhaps the most compelling reason—while this question would fit very nicely on Code Review, it isn't necessarily off-topic on Stack Overflow.
This is a perfectly reasonable Stack Overflow question. OP was not asking us to ...

It sounds like you've had a frustrating go at it. I'm not sure if another explanation will help, but I do want to take a stab at explaining why Stack Overflow is so picky about the quality of its questions.
First, programming is hard (you may have already noticed this), and following advice on Stack Overflow can be tough when you're starting out. This isn't ...

It's not automatic. If you come across a spammer that is doing this and hasn't been destroyed, let us know via a custom flag that points to the edit. You can do this on either the post they tried to vandalize or some random post if they were doing this on a wiki.
That's what was done in this case, and I destroyed the spammer and banned the one reviewer who ...

There appears to be a misunderstanding about what "should be improved" means.
Should Be Improved for questions where edits by the author or others would result in a question that is clear and answerable
This means that the author or others can edit the question into an answerable question. It means the author can edit it or someone else can edit it to ...

Unfortunately the default markup doesn't support the value attribute on the li item. I'm not sure why it is not supported but based on the supported HTML, I tested whether the ol element supports the start attribute. It does because it has been explicitly implemented by balpha:
[SOME_TEXT]
[SOME_TEXT]
[SOME_TEXT next ]
Here is the markup ...

The question shows no research effort, and is basically asking for someone to use off-site resources to answer your question. Exactly like you can do yourself.
On SO, it's better to do your own research and make your own attempt at solving the problem. Then if you run into problems with your implementation, that'd be a better time to ask a question, ...

Like ctrl+alt+del or ctrl-alt-del?
Don't know why you'd want to do that, having separate keys looks better and makes more sense to me, but just include them in a single <kbd> tag (like <kbd>ctrl+alt+del</kbd>) if that's what you want.
Or just do ctrl+alt+del instead.

Just edit the second question out of the post and tell the author to ask it in a new question if he really needs it answered.
Other than that, flagging as "too broad" is generally the right way to go when there are multiple questions asked in the same question.

It is not necessary to use HTML to achieve this. You can simply split your list into multiple lists and still use markdown syntax by inserting an empty HTML comment.
Content:
10. [SOME_TEXT]
<!---->
14. [SOME_TEXT]
15. [SOME_TEXT]
Result:
[SOME_TEXT]
[SOME_TEXT]
[SOME_TEXT]

Your question title and tags were pretty effective at scaring SO users away. There are not that many SO users that answer questions like this. Visual Studio plugin development is pretty esoteric, getting 7 views is not abnormal.
Putting a bounty on a question does not produce results instantly. You are now at the bottom of a list with 394 tough questions ...

One important thing to remember is that (unless I'm quite mistaken, in which case someone can correct me) hitting Should Be Improved sends the post to the Help and Improvement queue. Sending something there implies that someone other than the poster may be able to edit it into a good question. This could theoretically be edited into an on-topic question, but ...

This is a first post review. You clicked "no action needed" or attempted to upvote. Either way, that fails the audit.
Why is this an issue? Because first post reviews are one of the first sources of feedback to the OP about the quality of the answer and possibly working on helping the OP to improve the answer.
You could have down voted "no, this answer ...

The answer was deleted by the owner.
There was a "this is not answer" comment (which is actually wrong, because it is an answer, just a wrong one) and a down-vote so this is probably what prompted the owner to delete the answer.
I wasn't the moderator who handled the flag in this case but I think I know what the moderator who did was thinking.
You ...

Either use HTML entities such as &lt; and &gt;, or use backticks (`) to mark up the section as code.
Demo:
Using HTML escapes, &lt;Bad Ptr&gt; is rendered as:
<Bad Ptr>
Using backticks, `<Bad Ptr>` is rendered as:
<Bad Ptr>
Since you are talking about an error message here, I'd go with the backticks here.

Regular badges are forever, they are not reclaimed. Once awarded, it is yours to keep, regardless of what happens to your answer score later on.
That is, unless the moderators determined they were gained using heinous cheating, at which point they may ask a developer to revoke a badge. That's a highly irregular occurrence however.
Tag badges (expert ...

If that question were asked today it would be closed as off-topic because:
Questions asking us to recommend or find a book, tool, software library, tutorial or other off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
It is ...

With backslashes you can avoid the list generation altogether, though you will now have to leave two whitespaces at the end of each line to force a line break.
1\. lol
2\. pmsl
4\. rofl
5\. lmao
1. lol
2. pmsl
4. rofl
5. lmao

Question views adhere to a log-normal distribution with a mode around 40:
What that means is that most questions do not get thousands or even hundreds of views. Bounties do help, but not necessarily right away. I found your question on page 6 of the featured question list:
As you can see, your question is not particularly unloved. One question on that ...

Looks like unfinished code.
That sort of stuff is off-topic for Code Review.
Here's the close vote you'd get:
off-topic because... ->
Questions containing broken code or asking for advice about code not yet written are off-topic, as the code is not ready for review. After the question has been edited to contain working code, we will consider ...

You can suggest an edit to the tag wiki, but please ensure that you describe your edit properly in the "Edit summary". It helps reviewers to understand why you suggested the edit.
Collaborative editing is the strength of this site. One can suggest edits if they have less rep.
To edit a tag wiki, open the tag and select "Improve tag wiki". To view your ...

A comment goes a long ways to fix these kinds of problems. If you can word it with a positive attitude("You will probably get a better response if...") and they are willing to comply, then they will be learning how to write better questions. If we force their hand by editing it for them or closing without a comment, it's less likely that they will get any ...

Just do it manually, it is far easier.
There is a mechanism that can do it automatically, but it is only available to moderators and used when low-rep users post otherwise helpful comments as an answer. You'd have to flag your post for moderator attention and request they convert the post, but since this is easily done yourself, please don't go bother the ...

If you see very carefully the screenshot, you will notice that all of them are answers and answers have no tags, that's why the search results don't show them. I believe that the isanswered:no is only selecting answers instead of questions which is quite puzzling, maybe a bug.
Using is:q isanswered:no score:1 closed:0 would give you better results; all ...

They left those boxes able to overlap the footer because they decided they were more important than the links in the footer and tweaking the sidebar to prevent that overlap wasn't worth the time and effort.
So, if you want to click the links below those boxes, you'll just need to visit another page on the site that doesn't have those boxes that follow you ...